Yeah. That confused me so much that I didn’t figure out what the illusion was supposed to be like I usually do. I should have guessed that the “blue” and “green”, since they appeared as variations of the same color, were actually the same color.
Incidentally, I wish the Gimp (or even Photoshop) had a perceptive colors option, so that the color would automatically change depending on what colors were around it. Instead, I’ll have to play around to figure out what color those appear to be.
That’s the one I’m familiar with. That’s why I’m surprised I didn’t recognize this one.
The first image is a blurred negative of the color image. When you stare at it, you fatigue the color receptors in your eye. When you move the mouse onto the image, it is replaced by a B&W version of it. You then get an afterimage (which is the negative of the first color image) superimposed on top of it. Since the negative of the first image is the correct colors, it looks like a full color version.
The color illusions drive me nuts. Most illusions I can see through or manipulate once I understand the illusion; I can force myself to see ‘curved’ lines as straight, or flip the cube facing at will, for example. But I cannot make myself see the ‘green’ and ‘blue’, or the ‘light grey’ and ‘dark grey’, as the same colors. When I sample the colors individually, I can see that they’re the same, but in context it’s impossible to bull through the illusion. That makes them special IMO.
Holy crap. At first I had no clue what anyone was talking about–nothing changed for me when I moved the mouse over. Then I switched from Mozilla to IE, and… holy crap.
I know, hey? I was all, “nice joke - it *is *in color. They just put the color picture in the mouseover to fool with people.” Then totally did a double-take when my eyes moved and I saw it was in b&w all along.